RR1
Literacy: More than a Bunch of Words What exactly do we mean when we say literacy? In order to understand, we need to start with the very basics, starting with the definition itself. Szewd says "...the stunning fact is that we do not fully know what literacy is." According to the CIA World Factbook, literacy is "Age 15 and over, can read and write." While that doesn't live up to the philosophical expectations set by Brandt, Hamilton and the like, I will attempt to prove that is not necessary. My main argument is that simplicity is not to be out done, and that in fact literacy is over thought in the eyes of those who have questioned it. Mathematics is the summary of multiple skill groups, and when taught as basics are commonly referred to as math. Yet, when you reach higher levels of education, "math" has become trigonometry, algebra, and calculus. They are all within the same category, classifiable as "math," but are obviously different. The fields of science are no different, in primary school we are taught them all en masse, biology to physics. But again, with progression, they become independent and even less connected than that of mathematics; after all would you expect a marine biologist to know nuclear physics with an in-depth understanding? No, you wouldn't. When we talk about literacy, progressive learning has not branched into multiple fields; it’s simply literacy. Which of course allows for problems to emerge, but rather than question their nature, I believe that a few key descriptors could solve a great many issues. When regarding language, rather wondering if literacy encompasses all, specify so that it is easily understandable. This blog would therefore require you to be literate in English, thus problem solved. The argument that literacy is more than simple recognition of alphabetic symbols arranged in a cognitive fashion has been made as well and I offer a few terms to help with this: *Habitual Recognition- An almost subconscious knowledge from constant repition *Contextual Awareness- An understanding of events outside the text, which greatly influences its meaning. In the case of the stop signs and musical notes, we are imprinted with a sense of knowledge from a constant exposure that becomes second hand. A driver doesn't need to think deep thoughts delving into the inner meaning of life and how this stop sign is relative to the world in order to understand it, it is just understood. Similarly a musician can read and play sheet music based off the understanding of what it is. The example that even the youngest child can comprehend, might be that of facial expressions, with a quick look to a parents face an adolescent is instantly aware of the message being projected, and without a formal education. This is habitual recognition. Opposingly there is contextual awareness, the conscious of underlying themes and the messages the author intends to be conveyed. Animal Farm is a prime example, while on the surface it appears solely a fictional story, in actuality George Orwell was criticizing communistic socialism under Stalin. In this case, some form of prior instruction is required to grasp the full context. I believe that the researchers focused too much on literacy as it is, considering the "what's wrong?" without the "what can be done to fix this?" aspect being looked over. My idea of a solution is not flawless, but in the end does more to address the issue of literacy than the philosophical observations made thus far in the text. Back to Table of Contents